Could Election Fraud Issues Impact Races for Pro-Gun Folks?

When most people think of the voter fraud issue in Pennsylvania, they think of Philadelphia. With turnout running over 100% in some precincts in local-only election primaries, it’s no wonder the city has become the face of election fraud in the Commonwealth. So, outside of statewide races, it’s not something that most people would think impacts races with pro-gun votes since pro-gun candidates don’t run serious, competitive campaigns in Philadelphia.

However, there’s some kind of likely election law violation going on in Berks County which is home to portions of the districts of three pro-gun Congressional incumbents, two of whom are in somewhat competitive races.

An investigation into an unspecified violation of state election law began Thursday at the direction of the Berks County Board of Elections.

They note that the three Commissioners on the board aren’t talking, and the Democrat had to sit out of the vote on whether or not to investigate because of a conflict of interest. The District Attorney says that it’s best to have the outside investigator, and they claim that releasing any information about the investigation whatsoever will jeopardize it.

I have no idea whether the Berks County case is anything that could possibly be influenced by the new law this year over voter ID requirements, but preplanned violations of that new election law by both election officials and voters are have already been announced around the suburbs of Philadelphia.

Christopher L. Broach, a Democratic inspector of elections in the tiny borough of Colwyn, said he would not ask voters to prove who they are on Election Day. …

Though Broach is the only official publicly taking such a stance, Philadelphia’s nonpartisan Committee of Seventy received a call from a Pittsburgh poll worker saying he, too, plans not to demand photo ID from voters he knows. The law has set off defiant talk among voters as well, with a few vowing to vote without the required forms of photo ID.


An echo could be heard in Lower Merion Township. “No, I will not enforce it,” said Joe Breidenstein, 55, a Democratic judge of elections in Ardmore.

Part of Ardmore is in a competitive district for a key pro-Second Amendment vote in Congress. So this isn’t just an urban problem for the typically corruption-plagued city of Philadelphia. Violating election laws is now a planned method of potentially swaying the outcomes of elections in the suburban areas in ways that can cost us valuable seats in Congress.

9 thoughts on “Could Election Fraud Issues Impact Races for Pro-Gun Folks?”

    1. It’s leaving one place and going to another that is the attempted fraud. Routinely people are paid to go from poll to poll armed with a list of names for each location. It’s not only the name match, it allowing the poll workers to know you are from their district. (Are you voting in the right place?)

  1. Sounds like Mississippi. But vote fraud is a major problem in every voting precinct in America. If you do not know of it in your precinct it is only because it has not come to light – yet.

    For the 2012 election the only real solution is for every gunnie to vote. We cannot afford 55 percent turnout among the shooting community, it must be as close to 100 percent as we can make it.


  2. If I were a voter in these districts I would call the police and lodge an official complaint. Get it on the books. I was not asked for the REQUIRED ID, as per the law. I could easily state that I don’t know the Judge of elections at all and would. The Elephants are not that dumb and have their own plans, believe me!

    IGNORANCE or DEFIANCE of the law is no excuse.

    1. In too many of the places the police are on the wrong side; if not, it’s still up the the (almost always?) elected DA to decide to prosecute. If the state’s corrupt enough, plenty of the judges are also the wrong side.

      Particularly chilling is the Soros funded Secretary of State Project that works to get what they view as the right people counting the votes, they’ve had more than a few successes. Imagine how different history would be if Al Franken hadn’t won the critical 60th Senate seat with fraudulent votes.

  3. I live in a small town. We have a total of two precincts in the city, and I went to school with many of the election workers in my precinct. The woman who asked me for my picture ID at the August 7 primary was a woman whose brother I graduated high school with, and we were all in Methodist Youth Fellowship together for years. I have known this woman for nearly 60 years.
    Was I offended, inconvenienced, or intimidated by her request for a picture ID? Even though I have to travel nearly fifteen miles to a DMV to get one? No. This practice ensures the integrity of the voting process, and it’s worth it to me.

  4. Since these officials have openly announced they will violate the law, isn’t there grounds to sue to have them replaced before the election?

  5. I’m surprised the law doesn’t require the type and number of the ID used to be recorded in the voter logs, and any not being recorded being declared invalid.

    They would either have to ask for and record id’s or invalidate alot of votes.

  6. I cannot find where Tom Corbett’s allegations of “over 100 percent voter turnout” have been addressed since the day he made them, right before the Voter ID legislation was passed; however they are cited above as if they were a fact.

    Admittedly I have not spent more than a few minutes searching the issue, in the simplest ways (e.g., setting the Google search parameters to look only post-April 20, the date of the cited story) but if it has been resolved I will be very surprised.

    I’m bothered because with this issue, I have found so much evidence of people believing and running with bogus statistics; to an extent that would shame our opponents, who do the same thing with gun casualty issues. I’d hate to see our side succumbing to such temptations.

Comments are closed.